Setting Design vs Adventure Prep

[Ry]

Think of it like this: I make the 4 things a game can't get away without. The extras come out in play and I wing them by playing off of players' interests.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Again, though, you've obviously set up the expectation for your group that what you're prepping is support for their ability to pursue their own tangents. This is awesome, but I know that, in my case, I don't have enough time to prep this kind of D&D game on a regular basis.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the more common situation (it's true for my two D&D groups 99% of the time) is the group that's agreed to play through a given product ("Let's do Expedition to Castle Ravenloft") or take on what the DM has to throw at them for the night. In that case, announcing that you're going to ignore the plot seeds in Diamond Lake (AoW) and go exploring off the map would be, IMO, dickly behavior.

So on point, especially on the dickly behavior by players point

 

[Imaro]

Think of it like this: I make the 4 things a game can't get away without. The extras come out in play and I wing them by playing off of players' interests.

Why can't the player's characters generate all of these things, in a direction they want, if the setting is vibrant enough? MY players don't need me to construct the "monsters of the week scenario" all the time. The funny thing is I use to do that and realized it made them expect me to lead them by the nose. It took a while and me explaining that they could really do whatever they wanted numerous times, but now they show me where they want to go and it's already there for them to explore and I have to say my games are better for it. YMMV.

 

[Mark CMG]

Again, though, you've obviously set up the expectation for your group that what you're prepping is support for their ability to pursue their own tangents.

I was very purposeful to include both campaigns and one-shots in my example, since one might have such expectations but the other would have the opposite.

This is awesome, but I know that, in my case, I don't have enough time to prep this kind of D&D game on a regular basis.

IME, it doesn't really require any more time than that used to detail specific adventures. It's just a different approach.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the more common situation (. . .)

I cannot confirm or deny your suspicions as I have no data to do either.

(. . .) dickly behavior.

IME, that is indicative of a broader problem and needs to be addressed out of game.

 

[rounser]

IME, that is indicative of a broader problem and needs to be addressed out of game.

I don't think that was his point; he was pointing out the unspoken agreement that if the players know that the DM has prepped a certain area or adventure for the evening's play, they won't go on holiday to Hepmonaland ('I hear it's nice this time of year') or the Nine Hells ("let's go ring Asmodeus's doorbell") on a lark, with no plot hooks to draw them there. The fact that such an unspoken agreement usually exists is the point.

 

[Ry]

Why can't the player's characters generate all of these things, in a direction they want, if the setting is vibrant enough? MY players don't need me to construct the "monsters of the week scenario" all the time. The funny thing is I use to do that and realized it made them expect me to lead them by the nose. It took a while and me explaining that they could really do whatever they wanted numerous times, but now they show me where they want to go and it's already there for them to explore and I have to say my games are better for it. YMMV.

Who's running a monster of the week scenario? My players spend all their time exploring the world around them, deciding who to ally with, what matters to them, who to work against. I'm ready for it without doing reams and reams of setting prep.

 

[Imaro]

Who's running a monster of the week scenario? My players spend all their time exploring the world around them, deciding who to ally with, what matters to them, who to work against. I'm ready for it without doing reams and reams of setting prep.

How do they do all this if there's no setting prep and all you have ready is the next problem, threat, resource or reward? I really want to know.

 

[rounser]

I really want to know.

Status quo adventure locations. You can read that as "setting material" if you want, but when was the last time your setting material prep included specific traps, treasure, monster stats, NPCs, all by location, at encounter level? If it were in Dungeon magazine or a module, you'd call it an adventure. Stuff this specific doesn't appear in campaign setting books, except as a sample adventure in the back. The exception which proves the rule is something like the Wilderlands, but that's very much the exception to the rule.

"Well, not exactly, it's mostly about the elven migrations a thousand years ago, and how the culture of the halflings relate to the orcs, and Prince Zebedee's favourite color and so forth meaning he's going to declare war on Zoom-Zoomaland." I thought so.

 

[Ry]

All four of those categories are broadly defined. All four are modular.

(pulls out his fourfold deck)

Problem: Many dungeons have portals to a slave market maintained by yugoloth slavers and other fiends. This place is like an intricate anthill of caverns and twisting passageways, with major crossroads guarded by Molydeus demons (CR 19). The players can stumble across an old portal in a dungeon, or if they find themselves chasing captives in a dungeon, they may have to buy them back before they are sold off to some horrible demon.

Threat: A strange virus is spreading, which spreads via sound - the infected speak only Abyssal, and unless they know the language cannot even understand themselves. (DC 14 WIL save upon hearing, Cure Disease removes). If enough people are screaming abyssal at once, Tanar'ri may be summoned.

Resource: An organization of rangers and scouts marks trees, stones, or caverns in the area with Sylvan runes. These give simple clues as to an alternate entrances to a dungeon or warn of nearby dangers. If spotted (Spot DC 20), later runes are easier to find (DC 15).

Reward: From a high outcropping of rock, a character can see for miles and miles in all directions. The air atop the rock is clear and fresh - the first player to climb it receives an extra action point.

 

[Reynard]

Status quo adventure locations. You can read that as "setting material" if you want, but when was the last time your setting material prep included specific traps, treasure, monster stats, NPCs, all by location, at encounter level? If it were in Dungeon magazine or a module, you'd call it an adventure. Stuff this specific doesn't appear in campaign setting books, except as a sample adventure in the back. The exception which proves the rule is something like the Wilderlands, but that's very much the exception to the rule.

"Well, not exactly, it's mostly about the elven migrations a thousand years ago, and how the culture of the halflings relate to the orcs, and Prince Zebedee's favourite color and so forth meaning he's going to declare war on Zoom-Zoomaland." I thought so.

I think this cuts to the core of the disconnect we're having: variable definitions for "setting design" and "adventure design". Setting *can* be a lot of words describing stuff near and far, in both time and place, to te PCs, but it can also be naming specific NPCs ina town -- some even with stats -- and local lairs complete with maps and encounters. "Adventure design" to me means a specific problem in a specific place at a specific time -- none of which I need if I have done enough "setting design" (by my definition.

You say all you do is "adventure design" -- by my definition, you haven't given an example of "adventure design" yet, just a lot of crunchy setting design and game support design.

Don't get me wrong -- this is a very interesting discussion, but the lack of common terminology is making things more difficult than they need to be and overshadowing what might otherwise be excellent suggestions for DMs trying to figure out how to prep their games and settings.